On Sunday the wait should be over. A country’s tortured soul should find the
release it has sought for 24 years of increasingly bitter disappointment.

New Zealand, the sometimes precious guardians of the game, should lift the Webb Ellis Cup by beating France at Eden Park. Should they do so, for the first time the rest of the world will applaud.

Many people opposed the World Cup being held in New Zealand, for justifiable reasons such as the low revenues it would generate compared to a rival bidder like Japan.

However, anyone attending the tournament will attest to the efficiency of the organisation and that the host population has embraced the competition.

There has been reciprocation of this goodwill from visitors to hosts and not just for sympathetic reasons such as the Christchurch earthquake. Rather because overseas fans have witnessed the relationship between rugby and the New Zealanders and recognise their depth of feeling and knowledge for and about the game.

The schadenfreude enjoyed over five successive choking moments by New Zealand has been replaced by a feeling that they deserve success for setting the highest standards for 20-odd years. Part of this is due to the way they reacted to the enforced loss of their star fly-half, Dan Carter, and lingering doubts about the fitness of captain Richie McCaw.

Their performances since Carter’s withdrawal have steadily improved to a point where they comfortably outplayed Australia in their semi-final. It is doubtful that any of the other teams could have so successfully accommodated the loss of their best player.

It is difficult to make firm predictions about the final, so little has been seen of France’s potential. It is difficult to discern whether this is because they have not wanted to, or cannot, play the type of rugby with which they are habitually associated. There cannot have been a more contrary bunch of players nor a more unusual relationship between a coach and his squad.

One thing is certain: France cannot expect to defend and win by the odd penalty like they did in their quarter-final against New Zealand in 2007. The All Blacks have too many attacking threats, including the best back three in the world, Israel Dagg, Cory Jane and Richard Kahui, and the power of Ma’a Nonu and Sonny Bill Williams.

Australia tested the theory that New Zealand are vulnerable to aerial assault. This turned out not only to be erroneous but directly led to their defeat as they were unable to make any progress because of a lack of decent possession. Unable to build any momentum, they remained pinned in their own territory as the Kiwis’ back three regularly outkicked them for distance.

The French, on paper, might have a slight advantage in the front-five battle, but that aside they do not match the All Blacks in any other department, including fly-half, where Aaron Cruden, the third choice, has grown into a confident playmaker.

It was significant that in Conrad Smith’s press conference this week he said the French could hurt New Zealand with ball in hand but could not specify how that might be done. The fact is that beyond generalised jitters over historical losses, he, indeed we, cannot tell how France intend to mount an assault in the final.

Whatever the denouement, we must hope that for their own and the tournament’s sake they turn up and play unfettered. A damage-limited loss by 10 points or less would not be a valid challenge for rugby’s highest prize and to a man they would regret not having thrown everything in their armoury at New Zealand.